If you buy one camera, you are likely a billion times more likely to buy another. And, you have the disposable income to be in the market.
>> there's things one doesn't buy again often, like washing machines
You are not a whale, but you might be. Most people only buy one washing machine but a few people buy dozens (apartment managers and such). Such people, whales, sometimes buy one as test case. So ya, if you buy one then you are a strong maybe for one day buying many more.
Sometimes I wonder if it's about returns. "You bought one washing machine, but you might not like it and return it, so how about these others". Could even be that they're tracking sales only rather than sales minus returns, because returns take longer to come in so the metrics are harder to track.
>> A compromised device inside the White House network
A whitehouse network. It isn't like everything done in that building run through a single wifi router. It is likely an unprotected network for personal use with zero connecting to anything important.
If the progression of security over the last couple years has made anything clear, it's that letting the barbarians knock down a couple of walls because "well we have more walls" is not a winning defense strategy. The barbarians are very creative and will often exploit the inch you give in unexpected ways.
Great, they have some isolated network.
What are the chances it _never_ touches a device with a path to an important computer (e.g., one core router or switch at some point)? Good thing there haven't been any Cisco/Juniper/etc vulnerabilities ever.
What are the chances no important device _ever_ touches this isolated network? No important person ever gets annoyed at the security/filtering on the secured network and decides to connect to the public one instead? The secured one has some sort of issue, so their phone decides to connect to the guest network?
Are they going to compromise the military C&C network in the underground bunker? Probably not.
But it's probably more realistically damaging if they were to compromise some high level staffer's phone and using it as a listening device in a bunch of mid-level Whitehouse meetings.
Remember all the senior people are engaged in blatant corruption and illegality.
So you're looking at not just national security stuff, but the ability to get personal data like selfies of fucking goats or screenshots of Maltese & Azerbaijan bank transfers, etc. Makes it easy for nefarious parties to manipulate standing with POTUS and blackmail people. The only escape for many of these people is pardons.
It has cameras. Just tell it to retreat to above head height when it sees a person, or motion.
My worry is cats. I know cats that will go to war with such a robot. String, jerky movements, vertical retreat... cats are built to war with such things.
>> I don't see how you can have an independent business and be entirely dependent on third party for your operations
Like a lumber mill that buys logs from a logging company? Who subcontracts to individual fallers? Who buy their chainsaws from a chainsaw company, their fuel from a petrochemical company? No business isn't entirely dependent on third parties. That's what it means to exist in a healthy economy.
A "farm-to-table" megacorp that owns everything from the source of every raw material through to the finished product is a nightmare, an entity that needs to be reigned in and broken up. Capitalism is a competitive game, but a game that can never be allowed to end.
But what about the digital economy? It's interesting that the length of the supply chain for digital goods and knowledge work is nothing like physical goods. Google, Microsoft, and Apple are end to end, don't have to depend on any other software company if they don't want to (until LLMs, anyway, except Google).
>> don't have to depend on any other software company if they don't want to.
I am rather sure that Google is heavily reliant on Microsoft and Apple to produce the operating systems used on devices that are in turn used to view Google's ads. And Microsoft is heavily reliant on hardware manufacturers (firmware is also software) to make the machines that Windows lives inside. And Apple is reliant upon a thousand and one companies that enable the innumerable mobile networks, which include many layers of non-apple software.
They are not reliant on them second-to-second. If anthropic tells these businesses they can't use anymore, or price hike, or ... then those businesses are kaput, right that second.
Plus you can bet your firstborn everything passes through the NSA first. So seems like a spectacularly bad idea, especially for .eu business.
There's no "right this second" way to kaput Google, not even if you're Microsoft.
What is a "digital economy"? There is only one economy as far as I know. Division of company inputs into software and non-software is arbitrary and has no merit as far as I can see.
The difference is that the lumber mill isn't giving the logging company all the information required to run a lumber mill and the logging company isn't turning around and selling said information to anyone for $200/mo.
In my scenario, the only way anthropic and openai are profitable entities if they directly absorb the capacities of the companies, the same way Amazon "basics" exist to absorb the generic consumer product levels.
I'm not pointing out they'll take your secrets and sell them to the competition. I'm pointing out they will _be_ your competition. The same way Amazon basics competes with it's business interests.
GMs also have access to a greater number of memorized situations. Regardless of whether they are conscious of it or not, they have previously analyzed so many moves that they can cut off branches they just know instinctively to be dead ends. Machines could do this, directly reference a massive dataset of precomputed board positions, but that isn't considered a proper chess engine... despite the fact that human GMs do use such techniques.
Ya, when we specifically ask for hallucinated data we call it _inferred_ data. As I want "good" pictures, I give the system permission to add/remove/infer/hallucinate whatever data it can to achieve a "good" image. Very soon we will all look like supermodels... at least in photos.
Not everyone is a socmed influencer. Some of us want to take pictures that match reality.
In that case, most of the information in every single color digital photo is "hallucinated", because each sensor pixel only captures red, green, or blue, in a checkerboard pattern called a Bayer array; we get uniform RGB photos by applying heuristic interpolation algorithms to (shall we say?) "infer" the missing data.
Lol. The author seems to think that people only deserve privacy when in color. Faces are blocked in the original color image but not in the black-and-white depth image.
In all seriousness, far too many people think "throw AI at it" will solve every tech problem. AI remains inefficient, power hungry and mercurial. Replacing an adblocker or firewall with a constantly-running AI is as efficient and useful as rocket motors on a car.
These days? All rules are maybe this or maybe that depending on political winds.
Frankly, no company should be allowed to IPO without showing steady profit. An exchange or index that promotes IPOs of unprofitable companies diminishes its reputation, and the reputation of all other stocks it indexes.
Anthropic is free to continue selling shares privately. They can setup a website and take cc payments if the care so much.
There are rules for raising money as a startup, namely Series A, B and C funding rounds. To participate in these rounds you need to be an accredited investor (meet specific income or net worth criteria set by the SEC) which insure that you can weather the storm.
If you buy one camera, you are likely a billion times more likely to buy another. And, you have the disposable income to be in the market.
>> there's things one doesn't buy again often, like washing machines
You are not a whale, but you might be. Most people only buy one washing machine but a few people buy dozens (apartment managers and such). Such people, whales, sometimes buy one as test case. So ya, if you buy one then you are a strong maybe for one day buying many more.
reply